The
issue in this case is whether Mortgage Electronic
Registration Systems Inc. (MERS) should remain as a defendant
in a lawsuit by Maine property owners/mortgagors seeking to
quiet title to their property and recover various damages. I
conclude that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim
against MERS and Grant its motion to
dismiss.

Procedural
History

According
to the Amended Complaint, the plaintiffs, Clark and Anita
Stuart, are Maine property owners/mortgagors (their real
estate is both residential and business). Am. Compl. (ECF No.
23) ¶¶ 10, 11. In 2008, they obtained mortgage
financing on their property. Id. ¶¶ 12,
13. Mortgage Network, Inc. was the lender, but the mortgage
stated in all caps: “FOR PURPOSES OF RECORDING THIS
MORTGAGE, MERS IS THE MORTGAGEE OF RECORD” and, in
regular type, that the defendant Mortgage Electronic
Registration Systems Inc. (MERS) “is acting solely as a
nominee for” Mortgage Network, Inc. Id. &
Ex. B. As a result of certain assignments, in 2010 the
defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, pursued a judicial
foreclosure action in Maine Superior Court against the
Stuarts. (Nationstar was substituted in the case for the
defendant CitiMortgage, Inc. after CitiMortgage initially
started the foreclosure.) Id. ¶¶ 18,
21-22. Ultimately the Maine Superior Court dismissed the
lawsuit with prejudice for failure to prosecute, id.
¶ 29, and Maine's Law Court dismissed
Nationstar's attempted appeal. Id. ¶ 31.
Now the Stuarts have brought a lawsuit against MERS,
Nationstar and CitiMortgage that seeks to quiet their title
to the real estate and to recover various damages. The
defendants removed the lawsuit from Cumberland County
Superior Court to this federal court based upon diversity of
citizenship. The defendant MERS then moved to dismiss under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim against
it.

The
Amended Complaint's Claims

The
Stuarts assert nine counts:

1. To quiet their title to the real estate, and seeking
attorney fees;

2. Damages for slander of title to their real estate, and
attorney fees, on the basis that the existence of the
mortgage constitutes a slanderous statement;

3. Declaratory judgment that the Note and Mortgage are
extinguished;

4. Statutory declaration of their rights, with statutory and
exemplary damages and attorney fees;

5. Damages for tortious interference, including attorney
fees, because one or more of the defendants has carried fire
and casualty insurance on the property;

6. Intentional infliction of emotional distress for dunning
notices and credit information given to third parties;

7. Negligent infliction of emotional distress for the same
conduct; 8. Violation of the Maine Fair Debt ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.